Delivery of a promissory note,1 whether executed by the debtor,2 or by one of two or more joint debtors,3 or by a third person,4 as the executor of the debtor,5 has been held not to be prima facie absolute payment of an antecedent debt. If the creditor refuses to accept the maker of the note as his debtor, delivery by the debtor to the creditor of such note of a third person is not payment.6 The fact that a member of a partnership gives his individual note for a partnership debt does not operate as payment unless the creditor has agreed to accept it as payment; and unless the creditor has agreed to accept it as payment, the delivery of such note does not discharge the other partner from liability on the original indebtedness.7 Where A was indebted to B on a contract for plastering and paid four hundred and twenty-five dollars in cash and gave two notes executed by C, and B gave to A his receipt for fourteen hundred and five dollars "on account contract for plastering' it was held that the notes were prima facie conditional payment only, and the verdict of the jury that they were not taken in absolute payment will not be disturbed.8 Delivery of a note and chattel mortgage has been held not prima facie payment of a debt secured by mortgage;9 nor is delivery of a bond prima facie payment of an overdue instalment of interest on a debt secured by mortgage.10 Even if the instrument is taken as conditional payment only, failure to present it to the maker at maturity converts it into absolute payment.11

8 Sutphen v. Cushman, 35 111. 186; Wade v. Curtis, 96 Me 309, 52 Atl 762; Leas v James. 10 S. & R (Pa.) 307

9 Georgia. Darby v. Miller, 110 Ga. 952, 43 S E. 374

Kentucky. Proctor v. Mather, 42 Ky. (3 B Mon ) 353

Michigan. Bond v MeMahon, 94 Mich 557, 54 N. W. 281.

Nebraska. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Ky v Burns, 61 Neb 793. 86 N W. 483; Colby v Maw, 1 Neb. (unoff) 478. 95 N W 677

Ohio. Weller Co. v. Gordon, 7 Ohio C. C. (N.S) 303, 14 Ohio C. D. 407.

South Dakota. Esley v. Birnbaum, 9 S. D. 174, 68 N. W. 290.

Wisconsin. Cliver v. Heil, 95 Wis. 364, 70 N \Y. 346.

1 United States. Atlas Steamship Co. v. Land Co., 102 Fed. 358, 42 C. C. A. 398

California. London & San Francisco Bank v. Parrott, 125 Cal. 472, 73 Am. St. Rep 64, 58 Pac. 164.

IIlinois. Jansen v. Grimshaw, 125 111 468, 17 N. E. 850; Stone v. Church, 92 111. App. 77.

Iowa. Dean v. Ridgeway, 82 la. 757, 48 N. W. 923.

Kentucky. Kibbey v. Jones, 70 Ky. (7 Bush.) 243.

Michigan. Germain v. Central Lumber Co., 116 Mich. 245, 74 N. W. 644; Valade v. Masson, 135 Mich. 41, 97 N. W. 59.

Nebraska. H. F. Cady Lumber Co. v. Exposition Co. (Neb.). 93 N. \V. 961.

North Dakota. Lokken v. Miller, 9 N. D. 512, 84 N. W. 368.

Ohio. Sutliff v. Atwood, 15 O. S. 186; Price v. Coblitz, 21 Ohio C. C. 732, 12 Ohio C. D. 34.

Pennsylvania. Berlin Iron Bridge Co. v. Bonta, 180 Pa. St. 448, 36 Atl. 867.

South Dakota. Baker v. Baker, 2 S.

D 261, 39 Am. St. Rep. 776, 49 N. W. 1064; Grissel v. Bank, 12 S. D. 93, 80 N W. 161.

West Virginia. Cushwa v. Improvement Loan & Building Association, 45 W. Va. 490, 32 S. E. 259.

Wisconsin. Nash v. Meggett, 89 Wis. 486, 61 N. W 283.

"A promissory note does not discharge the debt for which it is given unless such be the express agreement of the parties; it only operates to extend until its maturity the period for the payment of the debt The creditoi may return the note when dishonored and proceed upon the original debt. The acceptance of the note is considered as accompanied with the condition of its payment/'

United States. The Kimball, 70 U. S (3 Wall.) 37, 45, 18 L. ed. 50 [quoted in Segrist v. Crabtree, 131 U. S. 287, 290, 33 L. ed. 125;] A Leschen & Sons Rope Co. v. Mayflower Gold Min. & R. Co., 173 Fed. 855, 35 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1.

Connecticut. Ferrigino v. Keasbey, - Conn. - , 106 Atl. 445.

Kansas. Moody v. Stubbs, 94 Kan

250, 146 Pac. 346.

Minnesota. Way v. Movers, 135 Minn. 330, 160 N. W. 1014.

North Dakota. Anderson v. Kain, - N. D. - 169 N. W. 501.

Oregon. Johnston v. Barrills, 27 Or.

251, 50 Am. St. Rep. 717, 41 Pac. 656; Johnson v. Paulson, 83 Or. 238,154 Pac. 685, 163 Pac. 435.

Wisconsin. McDonald v. Provident Savings Life Assurance Society, 108 Wis. 213, 81 Am. St. Rep. 885, 84 N. W. 154; Wagener v. Old Colony Life Ins. Co.. - Wis. - , 172 N. W. 729.

2 United States. A. Leschen & Sons Rope Co. v. Mayflower Gold Min. & R. Co., 173 Fed. 855, 35 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1.

Arkansas. Caldwell v. Hall, 40 Ark. 508, 4 Am. St. Rep. 64, 1 S. W. 62; Churchill v. Yeatman-Gray Grocer Co., Ill Ark. 520, 164 S. W. 283

California. London & San Francisco Bank v. Parrott, 125 Cal. 472, 73 Am. St. Rep. 64, 58 Pac. 164.

Connecticut. Merrill v. Kenyon, 48 Conn. 314, 40 Am. Rep. 174; Ferrigino v. Keasbey, - Conn. - , 106 Atl. 445.

Florida. Our Home Life Ins. Co. v. Peacock, 71 Fla. 35, 70 So 775.

Kansas. Bradley v. Harwi, 43 Kan. 314, 23 Pac. 566; Topeka Capital Co. v. Merriam, 60 Kan 307, 56 Pac 757.

Minnesota. Miller v. McCarty, 47 Minn. 321, 28 Am. St. Rep. 375, 50 N. W. 235; Way v. Movers, 135 Minn. 330, 100 N. W. 1014.

Mississippi. Starling v. Wyatt (Miss.), 27 So. 526.

North Dakota. Anderson v. Kain, - N. D. - , 169 N. W. 501.

New Jersey. Fry v. Patterson, 40 N. J. L. 612, 10 Atl. 300.

Ohio. Merrick v. Boury, 4 O. S. 60.

Tennessee. Columbia Grocery Co. v. Marshall, 131 Tenn. 270, 174 S. W. 1108.

West Virginia. Burdett v. Hayman, 63 W. Va. 515, 15 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1010, 60 S. E. 407; Bailey v. Riffe, 79 W. Va. 104, 00 S. E. 791.

Wisconsin. Matteson v. Ellsworth, 33 Wis. 488, 14 Am. Rep. 766.

3 Coleman v. Whitney, 62 Vt. 123, 9 L. R. A. 517, 20 Atl. 322.

4 England. Belshaw v. Bush, 11 C. B.

191.

Arkansas. Caldwell v. Hall, 49 Ark. 508, 4 Am. St. Rep. 64, 1 S. W. 62.

Illinois. Wilhelm v. Schmidt, 84 111. 183.

Iowa. Kruse v. Seiffert & Weise Lumber Co, 108 Ia. 352, 70 N. W. 118.

Kansas. Webb v. National Bank, 67 Kan 62, 72 Pac. 520.

Michigan. Gillett v. Knowles, 108 Mich. 602, 66 N. W. 407; Swan v. Gregory, 105 Mich. 457, 161 N. W. 033.

Nebraska. Chamberlain Banking House v. Wolsey, 60 Neb 516, 83 N W. 720; Edwards & Bradford Lumber Co v. Lamb, 05 Neb. 263, 145 N. W. 703.

New Jersey. American Brick & Tile Co. v. Drinkhouse, 50 N. J. L. 462, 36 Atl. 1034.

New York. Smith v. Ryan, 66 N. Y. 352, 23 Am. Rep. 60.

North Carolina. Terry v. Bobbins, 128 N. Car. 140, 83 Am. St. Rep. 663, 38 S. E. 470.

Pennsylvania. Shepherd v. Busch, 154 Pa. St. 140, 35 Am. St. Rep. 815, 26 Atl. 363; Collins v. Busch, 101 Pa. St. 549, 43 Atl. 378.

Rhode Island. Sanderson Fertilizer & Chemical Co. v. Tatlas, - R. I. -, 103 Atl. 780.

Tennessee. Perry v. Williamson (Tenn.), 56 S. W. 826.

Washington. Duggan v. Broom Co., 6 Wash. 593, 36 Am. St. Rep. 182, 34 Pac. 157.

West Virginia. Mansfield v. Dam-eron, 42 W. Va. 794, 57 Am. St. Rep. 884, 26 S. E. 527.

Wisconsin. Willow River Lumber Co. v. Luger Furniture Co., 102 Wis. 636, 78 N. W. 762.

5 Peter v. Beverly, 35 U. S. (10 Pet.) 532, 9 L. ed. 522.

6 Sanderson Fertilizer & Chemical Co. v. Tatlas, - R. I. - , 103 Atl 780.

Delivery of negotiable instrument has been held not to be payment of a contemporaneously created debt,12 whether the notes were executed by the debtor13 or by a third party.14

In the absence of specific agreement as to its effect, a note given by the debtor for a pre-existing debt is regarded as conditional payment in many jurisdictions.15

7 Burdett v. Hayman, 63 W. Va. 515, 15 L. R. A. (N.S ) 1019, 60 S. E. 497.

8 Shepherd v. Busch, 154 Pa. St. 149, 35 Am. St. Rep. 815, 26 Atl. 363

9 Baker v. Baker, 2 S. D. 261, 39 Am. St. Rep. 776, 49 N, W. 1064.

10 Terry v. Robbing, 128 N. Car. 140, 83 Am. St. Rep. 663, 38 S. E. 470.

11 Coleman v. Lewis, 183 Mass. 485, 97 Am. St. Rep. 450, 67 N. E. 603.

12 Segrist v. Crabtree, 131 U. S. 287, 33 L. ed. 125; Carlin v. Heller, 34 Ia. 256; Hoeflinger v. Wells, 47 Wis. 628, 3 N. W. 589; Wagener v. Old Colony Life Ins. Co., - Wis. - , 172 N. W. 720.

13 Lyman v. Bank, 53 U. S. (12 How.) 225, 13 L. ed. 965; Segrist v. Crabtree, 131 U. S. 287, 33 L. ed. 125; Hall v. Richardson, 16 Md. 396, 77 Am. Dec. 303.

14 Shriner v. Keller, 25 Pa. St. 61.

15 United States. Peter v. Beverly, 35 U. S. (10 Pet.) 532, 568, 9 L. ed. 522, 536; Lyman v. Bank of United States, 53 U. S. (12 How.) 225, 243, 13 L. ed. 965, 972; Downey v. Hicks, 55 U. S.

(l4 How.) 240, 243, 14 L. ed 404. 405; The Kimball (Duncan v. Kimballi, 70 U. S. (3 Wall.) 37, 45, 18 L. ed. 50, 64; The Emily Souder, 84 U. S. (17 Wall.) 666, 670, 21 L. ed. 683, 684; A Leschen & Sons Rope Co. v. Mayflower Gold Min. & R Co., 173 Fed 855, 35 L. R A. (N.S.) 1.

California. Comptoir D'Escompte v. Dresbach, 78 Cal. 15, 20 Pac 28.

Connecticut. Hine v. Roberts, 48 Conn. 267, 271, 40 Am. Rep. 170.

Illinois. Cheltenham Stone & Gravel Co. v. Gates Iron Works, 124 111. 623, 626, 16 N. E. 923.

Minnesota. Combination Steel & Iron Co. v. St. Paul City R. Co., 47 Minn. 207, 209, 49 N. W. 744.

New York. Tobey v. Barber, 5 Johns. (X. Y.) 68, 72, 4 Am. Dec. 326; Putnam v. Lewis, 8 Johns. (N. Y.) 389; Johnson v. Weed, 9 Johns. (N. Y.) 310, 6 Am. Dec. 279.

Wisconsin. Eastman v. Porter, 14 Wis. 40.